Latest news with #SB131
San Francisco Chronicle
02-07-2025
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
California YIMBYs just won a major battle, but the war over CEQA isn't close to finished
When Gov. Gavin Newsom signed revisions to the California Environmental Quality Act into law on Monday to expedite new housing, he and the YIMBY movement reacted as if they had just won a major war. 'To the NIMBY movement that's now being replaced by the YIMBY movement: go YIMBYs,' the governor said at a press conference. But the CEQA war isn't over yet — and major battles over law's purpose and role still lie ahead. To be sure, for housing advocates, this week's reforms are extremely significant: It will be a lot easier for developers to get housing approved. Two budget trailer bills (AB130 and SB131) made significant changes to CEQA. One major reform was to exempt all 'infill' housing from environmental review — housing that is located in built-up areas. Another reform exempted certain types of projects, including childcare centers and some manufacturing facilities. But in a way, these reforms are just more examples of what's come to be known as 'Swiss-cheese CEQA': The state punches a hole in the law to favor certain types of projects, but doesn't take a comprehensive look at what the law is for or how it should be reformed. CEQA doesn't protect the environment directly. By requiring environmental analysis on projects that impact the built or natural environment, it identifies potential damage that new projects can create and forces changes to minimize that damage. But it can be a long, expensive and unpredictable process — and it often stimulates litigation from opponents who want to kill a development but don't really care about the environment. That's why an exemption for infill housing is such a big deal. But Monday's legislation provided exemptions only for infill housing and a few other types of projects. CEQA still looms large in almost every other California construction project, whether it's a public infrastructure like a reservoir, a private development that doesn't fit the state's definition of infill or the BART extension to downtown San Jose. (CEQA review of the project, which also included federal environmental review, is so voluminous it needs to be broken up into dozens of documents online.) Legal advocacy organizations like the Center for Biological Diversity are skilled at using CEQA to go after these large infrastructure and development projects. And they're not going away because of Monday's reforms. Now that infill housing is exempt from CEQA, the biggest question is what role 'greenfield' development — new development on raw land that has never been touched before — will play in attacking the housing crisis and how CEQA should deal with such situations. As Republicans pointed out during Monday's state Legislature debate, just last week, the Center for Biological Diversity won an appellate court case on a large greenfield project in Los Angeles County. The project called for 19,000 houses on 12,000 acres and setting aside 45% of the land for permanent open space. The court found that the environmental impact report prepared for the project under CEQA had not used the right greenhouse gas emissions reduction methodology. The revised report — written after a previous court ruling — is 2,300 pages. It has to be redone because the court in Los Angeles still found it lacking. Nothing in the budget deal from Monday changes anything about the environmental review of this kind of project. California state policy rightly favors infill development near transit. But privately, even most YIMBY leaders and other experts will say that you can't fix the state's housing problem with infill alone. You need at least some outward expansion into previously undeveloped areas as well. But environmental review can take years, cost millions of dollars and easily be dragged out by litigation. Ultimately, the question the Legislature has to ask is not, 'What projects should be exempt from CEQA,' but 'What purpose is CEQA supposed to serve?' In the Bay Area, the existential battle over CEQA is likely to manifest in the form of California Forever, the huge greenfield project proposed for Solano County. Whatever you think about more suburban expansion, the backers of California Forever are at least attempting to promise a more compact and walkable community than other large greenfield projects in the state — many of which are more prototypically suburban. Yet it's still going to have to go through round after round of CEQA review — and most likely expensive litigation as well. There's also likely to be a major battle over the new exemption for advanced manufacturing, which was included in Monday's reforms. Advanced manufacturing, including using precision tools and other modern processes to manufacture high-tech products, is a major state economic development goal because many of these products are designed in California but manufactured elsewhere. But the definition of advanced manufacturing in state law is pretty squishy, meaning advocates are almost certain to litigate these projects depending on where such companies wind up locating. So, while Monday's action is a big deal, it's not comprehensive CEQA reform. Comprehensive reform would not just punch more holes in a flawed law; it would revisit and clarify the whole purpose of CEQA. That existential battle still lies ahead.
The Hill
01-07-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Newsom signs sweeping rollbacks of key California environmental review law
California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) on Monday signed legislation paring down the state's landmark environmental review laws in a bid to cut red tape and make housing more accessible. As part of his 2025-2026 state budget, the governor gave his stamp of approval to two bills — AB 130 and SB 131 — his office described as 'the most significant overhaul of California's housing and environmental review laws in decades.' 'Today's bill is a game changer, which will be felt for generations to come,' Newsom said in a statement. The two 'budget trailer bills' — measures that essentially serve as revisions to the state budget — include a streamlining package that remove certain development barriers, update review procedures for critical housing and infrastructure and create new tools for accelerating production. Garnering bipartisan support, the legislation involves implementing major reforms to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This pivotal statute, signed into law in 1970 by then-Gov. Ronald Reagan (R), required state and local agencies to disclose the potential environmental effects of all their decisions, including on housing-related initiatives. 'I just enacted the most game-changing housing reforms in recent California history,' Newsom wrote in a post on X late Monday. 'We're urgently embracing an abundance agenda by tearing down the barriers that have delayed new affordable housing and infrastructure for decades,' the governor added, calling upon Californians to 'get building.' Among the reforms included in the new bills are measures to speed up housing and infrastructure projects by streamlining their environmental review. Some such projects are infill housing — residences built in unused urban lots, high-speed rail, utilities, broadband — community centers, farmworker housing and wildfire prevention structures. Although the new rules maintain protections for natural and sensitive lands, they exempt local government rezoning procedures from CEQA requirements. The legislation also expands the Permit Streamlining Act, by restricting certain Coastal Commission housing appeals and accelerating permitting in coastal areas. Also within the bills are measures to freeze new residential building standards through 2031, with exceptions granted to emergency, fire and conservation-related updates. Sustainable financing tools, such as a revolving fund to reinvest equity from stabilized affordable housing into new developments, will also be made available through the laws. The approved actions also entail strengthening oversight of local homeless shelters via annual city and county inspections and authorizing the withholding of state funding if agencies fail to comply. The legislation also more than doubles the existing Renters Tax Credit by increasing credit to support renters up to $500 for qualified filers. State Sen. Scott Wiener (D), whose previous bill proposals provided the foundation for much of the new legislation, described the CEQA reforms in a Monday statement as 'a bold step forward toward tackling the root causes of California's affordability crisis.' He touted the CEQA exemptions for streamlining approvals for housing, childcare centers, clean water infrastructure, climate adaptation projects and advanced manufacturing: processes that improve or create entirely new materials and products. 'These bills get red tape and major process hurdles out of the way, allowing us to finally start addressing these shortages and securing an affordable California and a brighter future,' Wiener said. Despite earning support from both sides of the aisle, the bills have gotten pushback from environmental groups. A day before the legislation became law, Miguel Miguel, director of Sierra Club California, accused the state legislature of 'using backroom deals to undermine' California's 'bedrock environmental law.' 'Leaders are abusing the budget process to push these anti-environmental policies, slipping language that was formerly in AB 306 and SB 607, two bills that faced massive opposition from environmental groups, into trailer bills to bypass public input and subvert democratic accountability,' Miguel wrote in a last-ditch call for opposition to the bills. Meanwhile, as late as Monday morning, labor unions were appealing to Newsom and state legislators to reconsider a CEQA exemption on advanced manufacturing included in the bills. 'We know that exempting 'advanced manufacturing' industries from CEQA would expose us, our members, and colleagues to grave harm in our workplaces and communities,' the unions wrote in a collective letter. Among their specific concerns cited was the semiconductor industry's extensive use of toxic 'forever chemicals,' also known as PFAS, in their production processes. Citing previous usages of other contaminants from the 1960 to the 1990s, the writers stressed that pollutants harmed not only workers, but also neighboring communities. The unions also warned that the legislation 'would give carte blanche to companies like Tesla to expand without any environmental oversight.' But other groups celebrated the CEQA reforms as critical to solving California's looming housing and infrastructure crises. 'No longer will CEQA be leveraged to stall critical county wildfire, water and housing projects,' Jeff Griffiths, president of the California State Association of Counties, said in a statement. 'This legislation will make California more affordable for families by helping to alleviate our housing crisis and, in turn, reducing homelessness,' Griffiths added. Chris Elmendorf, a property law expert at University of California Davis, marveled in a post-signing analysis on X just how quickly Newsom's 'triumph over CEQA…went down' and the remarkable shift in the politics of reform that has taken foot in the past few years. He noted that just since the two trailer bills went public over the past week, one of the most powerful opponents — the California Building Trades Council — went from rejecting the legislation to expressing neutrality. 'The law that untold numbers of project opponents have leveraged for year after year after year of delays went from untouchable to demolished almost overnight,' Elmendorf stated.
San Francisco Chronicle
01-07-2025
- Business
- San Francisco Chronicle
California passes major overhaul of CEQA, hoping to kickstart housing production
SACRAMENTO — California lawmakers on Monday passed some of the most significant changes to the state's environmental review law since its inception that supporters say will lessen a major barrier to building housing. Reforming the state's landmark environmental law, the California Environmental Quality Act, has been discussed for years, but has proven to be particularly challenging because the law has staunch supporters among powerful environmental and labor groups. Despite many attempts by the Legislature to speed up housing construction, California home production remains stubbornly slow, something that has dogged Gov. Gavin Newsom. Facing the last two years of his governorship, Newsom threw his weight behind two major CEQA overhaul proposals in the Legislature and made his signature on the budget this year contingent on the passage of some of those provisions. That put immense pressure on Democrats in the Legislature to pass the bills to ensure the state will have a budget in effect on Tuesday when the 2025-26 fiscal year begins. The bills grant broad exemptions to CEQA for homes and other buildings in already developed areas. The lawmakers who crafted the original proposals argue that the law is regularly abused by people trying to block development and that building more in densely populated areas where people live and work is good for the environment. Cities and counties are already required to plan to build housing to meet their population's needs and conduct environmental assessments as part of that work. The legislation passed Monday will exempt housing in already developed areas in compliance with those housing plans from being subject to an additional environmental review. The bills also exempt from CEQA various individual types of projects, including childcare centers in nonresidential areas, farmworker housing, wildfire risk reduction projects, food banks in industrial areas, advanced manufacturing sites and health clinics less than 50,000 square feet. Republicans and Democrats alike raised concerns about the governor's move to push the policies through as part of the budget, arguing that the process was rushed and didn't allow for enough deliberation on controversial provisions of the bills. Initial versions of the bills drew swift backlash, especially from labor unions, last week. Many of labor unions' concerns were assuaged with amendments taken to one of the bills, but opposition from environmental groups has persisted. Many environmental groups opposed one of the bills, SB131, particularly because they said it will not protect habitats for endangered species and allow advanced manufacturing projects to proceed without environmental review. Natalie Brown of the Planning and Conservation League called it 'the worst anti-environmental bill in decades' during a Monday committee hearing. 'We're in a nature crisis, we're seeing unprecedented loss of wildlife, and that's to be made worse with this bill,' said Laura Deehan with the group Environment California. 'We're also very concerned about opening the floodgates for new development that could be really polluting … We also think it was ridiculous to do this type of action behind closed doors in a budget bill.' But supporters of the bills say CEQA needs to be reined in. Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, pointed to lawsuits against a food bank in Alameda and a housing development in San Francisco that were both blocked because people sued under CEQA to preserve parking lots. He said the bills passed Monday will make it 'easier and faster to build new housing.' 'If California is ever going to truly tackle our crisis of affordability, we need to build an abundance of housing, child care centers, transportation, water infrastructure, broadband, and all of the things that make life better and more affordable for people,' Wiener said. The bills passed Monday also contain funding for homeless aid, which Newsom had at first tried to prevent, saying cities and counties had already gotten enough money from the state and needed to start making progress in decreasing their homeless populations. The bill includes half a billion dollars for the state's homeless aid program. Bill Fulton, a planning expert and former Ventura mayor who has advocated for CEQA reform, said that the changes passed Monday are significant but are not a panacea. 'I don't think this alone is going to create a housing boom,' he said. 'I think this, together with other things, will gradually increase the amount of housing approved.'
Yahoo
08-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Letters: SNAP cuts are nothing to be proud of; Fair, transparent redistricting process needed
Recently, Congressman Glenn Thompson wrote the following about the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP): 'Revitalizing Rural America: This week, the House Agriculture Committee passed its portion of the House's reconciliation budget bill. It restores integrity to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, provides relief to farmers, and invests in the future of rural America. ... As Chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, I was proud to lead this legislation that strengthens the agricultural supply chain and puts rural America back at the center of our policy agenda ...' Let's set the record straight. This bill does not restore integrity of SNAP; it guts the program by cutting $300 billion in federal funding. This bill will hurt farmers and especially rural communities. SNAP recipients spend their benefits in local grocery stores, so SNAP dollars support jobs involved in producing, transporting, and marketing food. Food security means access by all people at all times to enough food for an active, healthy life. Without food security, children are at greater risk of poor health and development (Economic Research Service, USDA, 2013). Along with cuts to Medicaid, the plight of low-income families will be worse, as families face both higher health care costs and less money for food. U.S. Department of Agriculture research shows that expanding SNAP benefits in times of recession reduces food insecurity. (Economic Research Service, USDA, 2011, 2013). Congressman Thompson: What is there to be 'proud about' in taking food from low-income children and families to lower taxes for the wealthy? Lucia Kaiser, State College As a member of Generation Z, I grew up in an era defined by extreme partisanship. Unwillingness to cooperate across political parties has eroded trust in democracy. Legislation in the Pennsylvania House and Senate State Government Committees offers hope for meaningful reform by reducing polarization and legislative gridlock through a fair and transparent redistricting process for future generations. House Bill 31 and Senate Bill 131 would amend the Pennsylvania Constitution by establishing an independent redistricting commission. The bills' numbering reminds us that districts will be redrawn in 2031. Currently, political parties control the redistricting process. Majority and minority leaders draw district lines not based on population but on what would be most likely to maintain their power. HB31 and SB131 reduce partisanship by establishing an independent commission of citizens, which will now include previously excluded independent voters. The current redistricting process also lacks rules regarding transparency. Committee chairs can hold hearings for congressional districts but are not required to do so. HB31 and SB131 mandate that all information be publicly shared and available for public comment. So far this year, the Pennsylvania General Assembly has enacted only two bills, but June is their most active month with at least 14 days in session. As chair of the State Government committee, Senator Cris Dush determines whether SB 131 will be put to a committee vote. To learn more about the bills, check out or stop by Fair Districts tables at Pride, Juneteenth, and/or Arts Fest. Noah Bradford Demo, State College It is ironic that draft dodger Trump, who has repeatedly defamed our country's military, is insisting on having a military parade that will undoubtedly bring more attention to his failures. Moreover, it is outrageous that millions of dollars will be spent on such an event, especially after the draft dodger withdrew funding for life-saving veteran health care services including mental health and addiction treatment, the Veterans Crisis hot line, and other services designed to help veterans who lost a limb while serving our country in harm's way. Even more alarming is the fact that the draft dodger and his sycophants are trashing the Constitution and the rule of law while Republican members of Congress sit idly by as they watch the dismantling of our governmental agencies. As indicated by retired Major General Paul Eaton, every patriotic American should be scared of the grave threat that the draft dodger poses to our democracy. Americans who cherish our democracy must stand up and join forces with those of us who will resist the draft dodger and his billionaire oligarchs. There are many ways to resist the draft dodger including speaking out to your state and congressional representatives, voting in primaries and elections for better representatives, and providing financial support to organizations that file federal lawsuits against the draft dodger. Kevin Alloway, Port Matilda
